audit-events
Skill2 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Audit existing product analytics events for correctness, completeness, consistency, identity handling, and analysis readiness. Use when instrumentation seems unreliable, metrics disagree, a feature lacks visibility, or a team wants to verify tracking before analysis.
In this repository45 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- projects/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/analytics/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/communication/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/competition/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/data/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/design/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/evidence/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/learning/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/meetings/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/orchestration/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/qa/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/setup/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/support/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- projects/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/analytics/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/communication/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/competition/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/data/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/design/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/evidence/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/learning/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/meetings/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/orchestration/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/qa/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/setup/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/support/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- analyze-product-usageSkill
- create-tracking-planSkill
- analyze-team-communicationsSkill
- competitive-analysisSkill
- analyze-query-resultsSkill
- build-querySkill
- build-prototypeSkill
- analyze-customer-evidenceSkill
- analyze-product-contextSkill
- improve-skillsSkill
- analyze-meetingsSkill
- run-product-workflowSkill
- test-product-flowSkill
- configure-workspaceSkill
- analyze-support-ticketsSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 12
Verify source readiness, event dictionary authority, identity rules, exclusions, and whether product-flow sampling is permitted.
- Distinctive: line 21
Check event triggers, naming, property types, required fields, identity rules, ordering, duplication, and version drift.
- Distinctive: line 22
Check whether test, employee, bot, demo, and internal activity can be identified.
- Distinctive: line 27
Do not modify instrumentation without explicit approval.
- Very specific: line 36
Every field above must appear as a labeled section in the produced output.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Audit Events
<!-- CORE:BEGIN -->Contract
- Require the decision or product flow, expected instrumentation, observed source scope, environment, and permission boundary.
- Verify source readiness, event dictionary authority, identity rules, exclusions, and whether product-flow sampling is permitted.
- Without observed data or flow access, provide a partial documentation audit and name what remains unverified; do not claim runtime correctness.
- Emit a reusable evidence packet when the audit informs a broader investigation.
<!-- CORE:END -->Process
- Identify the product flow and decisions the instrumentation must support.
- Gather the expected tracking plan, current event dictionary, and observed event data.
- Check event triggers, naming, property types, required fields, identity rules, ordering, duplication, and version drift.
- Check whether test, employee, bot, demo, and internal activity can be identified.
- Compare expected coverage with observed coverage.
- Sample important events against the real product flow when access permits.
- Classify issues by severity and the decisions they could distort.
- Recommend the smallest corrections and validation plan.
- Do not modify instrumentation without explicit approval.
<!-- CORE:BEGIN -->Output
List confirmed coverage, gaps, data-quality risks, affected analyses, recommended fixes, and verification steps.
Required fields: Confirmed coverage|Gaps|Data-quality risks|Affected analyses|Recommended fixes|Verification steps
Every field above must appear as a labeled section in the produced output. Verify with evals/check-output.sh audit-events <artifact>.
<!-- CORE:END -->Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

